The Beebe Corp.

In the Matter of THE BEEBE CORPORATION and UNITED HATTERS, CAP & MILLINERY WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, A. F. OF L. Case No. ?-R-4929.-Decided November 25, 1944 Nordlinger, Riegelman, Cooper & Benetar, by Mr. David L. Benetar, of New York City, and Mr. Melton L. Epstein, of Beacon, N. Y., for the Company. Mr. Elias Lieberman, of New York City, by Mr. Vinson G. Aronson, of New York City, for the Union. Mr. Louis R. Mercado, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition -duly filed by United Hatters, Cap & Millinery Work- ers International Union, A. F. of L., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of The Beebe Corporation, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appro- priate hearing upon due notice before Jerome I. Macht, Trial Ex- aminer. Said hearing was held at New York City on October 18 and 21, 1944. The Company and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were afforded an opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The Trial Exaaniner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board. For the reasons stated in the margin, the Company's motion to dismiss the petition for failure to allege that the Union represented a majority of the Com- pany's employees is without merit and is hereby denied.' i The Company 's contention that the petition alleges that the Union represents only 40 percent of the employees , is incorrect. That allegation is intended to refer only to the number of signed designations which the Union has actually received and does not mean that the Union may not also represent other employees who have not executed such designations The record shows that the Union has requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bargaining representative . Implicit in such a request is a sufficient claim of majority representation to warrant the Board to proceed with the petition. 59 N L , R B., 105. 538 THE BEEBE CORPORATION 539 Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. TIIE BUSINESS OF TIIE COMPANY The Company, a New York corporation With its principal office and plant in Beacon, New York, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of felt hat bodies for men's and ladies' hats. During the past year the Company purchased materials in excess of $225,000, of which approximately 75 percent Was received from points outside the State of New York; during the same period it sold furnished products valued in excess of $500,000, of which approximately 5 percent was delivered to points outside the State 'of New York. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. IT. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED United Hatters, Cap and Millinery Workers International Union, A. F. of L., affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership certain employees of the Company. III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of the Company's employees until the Union has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. A statement of a Field Examiner, introduced into evidence at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate= 2 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 43 cards , all of which bore apparently genuine original signatures , that the names of all persons appearing on the cards were listed on the Company's pad roll of July which contained the names of 108 employees in the appropriate unit , and that the cards were dated as follows February, 39 Mareh , 1 , undated, 3 The Company contends that the Union 's shoeing of interest is insufficient to warrant a direction of election because (7) the cards submitted to the Field Examiner show that the Union does not represent a majority , of the Company 's employees, ( 2) too long a time has elapsed between the dales on which the bulk of the cards were executed and the date of the hearing, and ( 3) the Company was afforded no opportunity to check the genuineness of the signatures We find no merit in the Company' s contentions . As we have fre- quently stated, authorization or membership cards are required , not as proof of the precise number of emploiees who desire to be represented by a labor organization , or as a basis for determining the exclusive representative, but simply to provide a reasonable safeguard against the indiscriminate institution of proceedings by labor organizations which might have little or no membership in the unit claimed to be . appropriate See Matter of Hillside Fluor Spar Mines, 56 N L R. B 664 , and cases cited therein 540 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union 3 contends that the appropriate unit should consist of all production employees, excluding executives, managerial, super- visory, clerical, shipping department and maintenance employees and foremen. The Company would include all of its employees except executives. The Board has frequently found to be appropriate a similar unit to the one sought by the Union. We consequently find a unit of produc- tion employees to be appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. Foremen-The Company employs eight foremen, one of whom at times acts as an assistant foreman. They are all supervisors with authority to discipline employees as well as effectively recommend hiring and firing. They are clearly within our definition of super- visory employees and we will exclude them from the unit. Firemen-The Company employs four firemen, whose duties are to operate and maintain the steam plant which furnishes the factory with heat and power. They are confined by their duties to the boiler room, except when they also act as watchmen. They are clearly maintenance employees. We shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit. Clerical.-There are three clerical employees who perform the usual clerical duties of office workers and are not eligible-to membership in the Union. Their interests differ from those of the production workers. We shall, accordingly, exclude them from the unit. Mechanics-There are two mechanics employed by the Company whose duties are to keep the machinery of the plant in adjustment and repair. One of these employees is not regarded as highly skilled and spends much of his time as a coal passer. They are strictly main- tenance employees and we shall exclude them from the unit. Shipping Department employees-The Company employs at the present time only one employee in the shipping department; his duties are to supervise and prepare the merchandise for shipping. He is regarded by the Company as foreman of the department, and should additional shipping employees be added he would act as foreman. Their interests differ from those of the production employees, and we shall, accordingly, exclude them. 8 The Union, organized in 1840 , limits its membership to the production workers in the hat, cap, and millinery trades, and does not admit to membership operating, maintenance. and clerical employees. THE BEEBE CORPORATION 541 Inspectors and stampers-These employees inspect and stamp the hat bodies before they are shipped: Their interests are the same as those of the production workers. The parties agree to their inclusion .within the unit. We shall, accordingly include them within the unit. We find that all production employees including inspectors and stampers, but excluding foremen, mechanics, shipping and mainte- nance employees, firemen, clerical, executive and managerial employees and all supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, dis- charge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We shall direct that the question concerning representation which has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em- ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Election herein, subject to the linnitations and additions set forth in the Direction. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vetted in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of'thc investigation to ascertain representa- tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Beebe Corpo- ration, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as pos- sible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the,employees in the unit found appro- priate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll -period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including em- ployees who did not work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States who present themselves in per- son at the polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not be rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United Hatters, Cap, and Millinery Workers Inter- national Union, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.